Breaking: Holder DOJ Went Judge Shopping to Three Different Judges Armed With Criminal Warrants for James Rosen The Holder Department of Justice went judge shopping with criminal warrants for James Rosen.

Two separate judges refused to offer DOJ the ability to secretly search the contents of Rosens e-mail account. A third judge, Royce C. Lamberth, appealed the decision and overturned the order of the two judges.

Judge Royce C. Lamberth was the third judge approached by the DOJ. He appealed two previous judges decision and allowed the DOJ to secretly snoop on FOX News reporter James Rosen.

Let me see, turned down by two judges, goes to a third, highly unethical. Then they allegedly told Fox News about the subpeonas but Fox has no record of being told. Methinks we have the makings of a case against Mr. Holder. And not to forget, his excellency put Holder in charge of looking into this problem. Seems to me his excellency should go too as an accessory or in common parlence, a cover up artist.

The subscriber therefore will never know, by being provided a copy of the warrant, for example, that the government secured a warrant and searched the contents of her e-mail account, Judge John M. Facciola wrote in an opinion rejecting the Obama Administrations argument.

Let me see, turned down by two judges, goes to a third, highly unethical.

The original New Yorker story, on which this Gateway Pundit "recap" is based, provides the pertinent information. The Gateway Pundit recap is poorly written. The first "two judges" were magistrate judges; Judge Lambeth is a U.S. district court judge.

There is nothing "unethical" about DOJ's appealing to a U.S. district court judge an order of a magistrate judge with which it disagrees. That's how the process works. Simply put, there was no "judge shopping" here.

What an idiotic characterization by Jim Hoft. Taking an appeal of a denial is not "judge shopping." Judge shopping would be going from one trial court to another until you get a trial court / magistrate to sign the warrant.

Not defending Lamberth's decision, but his role is to review decisions by lower courts.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.